Is subliminal face processing modulated by attentional task sets? Evidence from masked priming effects in a gender decision task

Eun-Jim Sim 1 , Marcel Harpaintner 2 ,  and Markus Kiefer 2
  • 1 Ulm University, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy III, 89075, Ulm, Germany
  • 2 Ulm University, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy III, Ulm, Germany


Unlike classical theories of automaticity, refined theories suggest that unconscious automatic processes depend on cognitive control settings. Cognitive control influences on unconscious word and object processing are well documented, but corresponding findings in the field of face processing are heterogeneous. The present study therefore investigated, whether subliminal face priming in a gender categorization task is susceptible to feature-specific attention. Participants performed a gender decision task by orthogonally varying gender congruency (prime-target: same vs. different gender) and emotion congruency (prime-target: same vs. different emotional facial expression) using a masked priming paradigm. Perceptual vs. emotional induction tasks, performed prior to prime presentation, served to activate corresponding attentional task sets. Subliminal gender priming (faster reactions to gender-congruent primes) differed as a function of induction task and emotional congruency. Following perceptual induction, gender priming was only obtained in the emotionally congruent condition, whereas following emotional induction gender priming was observed independently of emotional congruency. In line with the classical notion of automaticity, subliminal gender priming did not depend on a specific attentional focus. However, attention to shape facilitated subliminal processing of task-irrelevant emotional facial expressions. Most likely, mutual facilitation of emotionally congruent prime and target representations enhanced gender priming compared with emotionally incongruent pairings.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Ansorge, U., Kunde, W., & Kiefer, M. (2014). Unconscious vision and executive control: How unconscious processing and conscious action control interact. Consciousness and Cognition, 27, 268-287.

  • Ansorge, U., & Neumann, O. (2005). Intentions determine the effect of invisible metacontrast-masked primes: Evidence for top-down contingencies in a peripheral cuing task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(4), 762-777. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.4.762

  • Damian, M. F. (2001). Congruity effects evoked by subliminally presented primes: Automaticity rather than semantic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27(1), 154-165.

  • de Gelder, B., Vroomen, J., Pourtois, G., & Weiskrantz, L. (1999). Non-conscious recognition of affect in the absence of striate cortex. Neuroreport, 10(18), 3759-3763.

  • Dell’Acqua, R., & Grainger, J. (1999). Unconscious semantic priming from pictures. Cognition, 73(1), B1-B15.

  • Dimberg, U., & Petterson, M. (2000). Facial reactions to happy and angry facial expressions: Evidence for right hemisphere dominance. Psychophysiology, 37(5), 693-696.

  • Draine, S. C., & Greenwald, A. G. (1998). Replicable unconscious semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(3), 286-303.

  • Duckworth, K. L., Bargh, J. A., Garcia, M., & Chaiken, S. (2002). The automatic evaluation of novel stimuli. Psychological Science, 13(6), 513-519. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00490

  • Eckstein, D., & Perrig, W. J. (2007). The influence of intention on masked priming: A study with semantic classification of words. Cognition, 104(2), 345-376. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.005

  • Finkbeiner, M., & Palermo, R. (2009). The role of spatial attention in nonconscious processing: A comparison of face and nonface stimuli. Psychological Science, 20(1), 42-51.

  • Green, D., & Swets, J. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics Wiley.[arLEK, DDD. NAM, MT].

  • Goeleven, E., De Raedt, R., Leyman, L., & Verschuere, B. (2008). The Karolinska directed emotional faces: a validation study. Cognition and emotion, 22(6), 1094-1118.

  • Hedger, N., Adams, W. J., & Garner, M. (2015). Fearful faces have a sensory advantage in the competition for awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,41(6), 1748-1757.

  • Johnson, M. H. (2005). Subcortical face processing. Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 6(10), 766-774. doi: 10.1038/nrn1766

  • Jolij, J., & Lamme, V. A. (2005). Repression of unconscious information by conscious processing: Evidence from affective blindsight induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(30), 10747-10751.

  • Khalid, S., & Ansorge, U. (2017). Subliminal face emotion processing: A comparison of fearful and disgusted faces. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1028-1046.

  • Khalid, S., Finkbeiner, M., Konig, P., & Ansorge, U. (2013). Subcortical human face processing? Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(4), 989-1002. doi: 10.1037/a0030867

  • Kiefer, M. (2002). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects. Cognitive Brain Research, 13(1), 27-39.

  • Kiefer, M. (2012). Executive control over unconscious cognition: Attentional sensitization of unconscious information processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 61. doi:

  • Kiefer, M. (2018). Cognitive control over unconscious cognition: Flexibility and generalizability of task set influences on subsequent masked semantic priming. Psychological Research, 83(7), 1556-1570. doi: 10.1007/s00426-018-1011-x.

  • Kiefer, M., Adams, S. C., & Zovko, M. (2012). Attentional sensitization of unconscious visual processing: Top-down influences on masked priming. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 8(1), 50-61.

  • Kiefer, M., & Brendel, D. (2006). Attentional modulation of unconscious ‘automatic’ processes: Evidence from event-related potentials in a masked priming paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(2), 184-198.

  • Kiefer, M., Liegel, N., Zovko, M., & Wentura, D. (2017). Mechanisms of masked evaluative priming: Task sets modulate behavioral and electrophysiological priming for picture and words differentially. Social cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(4), 596-608. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsw167

  • Kiefer, M., & Martens, U. (2010). Attentional sensitization of unconscious cognition: Task sets modulate subsequent masked semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(3), 464-489. doi: 10.1037/a0019561

  • Kiefer, M., Sim, E. J., & Wentura, D. (2015). Boundary conditions for the influence of unfamiliar non-target primes in unconscious evaluative priming: The moderating role of attentional task sets. Consciousness and Cognition, 35, 342-356. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2015.01.010

  • Kiefer, M., & Spitzer, M. (2000). Time course of conscious and unconscious semantic brain activation. Neuroreport, 11(11), 2401-2407.

  • Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., et al. (2010). Control and inference in task switching - A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 849-874.

  • Kiss, M., & Eimer, M. (2008). ERPs reveal subliminal processing of fearful faces. Psychophysiology, 45(2), 318-326. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00634.x

  • Klotz, W., & Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 976-992.

  • Lamy, D., Mudrik, L., & Deouell, L. Y. (2008). Unconscious auditory information can prime visual word processing: A process-dissociation procedure study. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3), 688-698. doi:

  • Lang, P., & Bradley, M. M. (2007). The International Affective Picture System (IAPS) in the study of emotion and attention. Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment, 29.

  • Lundqvist, D., Flykt, A., & Öhman, A. (1998). The Karolinska directed emotional faces (KDEF). CD ROM from Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychology section, Karolinska Institutet.

  • Marcel, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 15(2), 197-237.

  • Martens, U., Ansorge, U., & Kiefer, M. (2011). Controlling the unconscious: Attentional task sets modulate subliminal semantic and visuo-motor processes differentially. Psychological Science, 22(2), 282–291.

  • Martens, U., & Kiefer, M. (2009). Specifying attentional top-down influences on subsequent unconscious semantic processing. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 5, 56-68.

  • Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(1), 4-26.

  • Neumann, O. (1984). Automatic processing: A review of recent findings and a plea for an old theory. In W. Prinz & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Cognition and motor processes (pp. 255-293). Berlin: Springer.

  • Öhman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(3), 466-478.

  • Oldfield, R. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.

  • Palermo, R., & Rhodes, G. (2007). Are you always on my mind? A review of how face perception and attention interact. [Review]. Neuropsychologia, 45(1), 75-92. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.04.025

  • Pessoa, L., & Adolphs, R. (2010). Emotion processing and the amygdala: from a’low road’to’many roads’ of evaluating biological significance. Nature reviews neuroscience, 11, 773-782. doi:

  • Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictible switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 207-231.

  • Schmitz, M., & Wentura, D. (2012). Evaluative priming of naming and semantic categorization responses revisited: A mutual facilitation explanation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(4), 984-1000. doi: 10.1037/a0026779

  • Schmitz, M., Wentura, D., & Brinkmann, T. A. (2014). Evaluative priming in a semantic flanker task: ERP evidence for a mutual facilitation explanation. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(1), 426-442. doi: 10.3758/s13415-013-0206-2

  • Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84(1), 1-66.

  • Spruyt, A., De Houwer, J., & Hermans, D. (2009). Modulation of automatic semantic priming by feature-specific attention allocation. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(1), 37-54.

  • Tanaka, J. W., Kiefer, M., & Bukach, C. M. (2004). A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: Evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cognition, 93(1), B1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.011

  • Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., & Schwarzbach, J. (2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(10), 6275-6280.

  • Wentura, D., & Rothermund, K. (2003). The “meddling-in” of affective information: A general model of automatic evaluation effects. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 51-86): Erlbaum.

  • Zovko, M., & Kiefer, M. (2013). Do different perceptual task sets modulate electrophysiological correlates of masked visuomotor priming? Attention to shape and color put to the test. Psychophysiology, 50(2), 149-157. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01492.x


Journal + Issues

The journal publishes original research in the broad areas of experimental and applied psychology, including cognitive, social, and developmental psychology, as well as health and clinical, educational, and occupational psychology. We encourage research that is at the intersection of psychology’s subdisciplines and offers integrative approach.